My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE69651
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE69651
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:18:43 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:59:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1983033
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/10/1983
Doc Name
WALSTRUM MINE ADEQUACY 3 MLRB 83-33
From
ENVIRONMENT INC
To
MLRD
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />are interior benches with zero opportunity for landslide or <br />damage off the affected lands. The operator is as aware of rock <br />mechanic problems in this type operation as is the Division and <br />the application takes note of this on pages 10 and 11. Rock <br />outcrops of the same material in nearby areas show good <br />long-range stability. The highway has been constructed leaving <br />some rather extraordinary highvralls hanging over the highway. <br />Highwall certification was discussed in the ad hoc committee and <br />failed outstandingly. <br />10. Albert Frei has entered into a contract for purchase of the <br />Conoco complex. Blasting procedures will be determined in the <br />field in the very first days of the operation. The parameter for <br />ground vibration is not to exceed 0.5 inches per second peak <br />particle velocity while limiting air blast to a range from 110 to <br />113 dB. A sequential timer blasting machine, electric detonators, <br />stemuning and blast depth variations will be used for maximum <br />control. The holes are expected to be dry; therefore the <br />operator plans to use ANFO as the explosive. <br />C. Exhibit E - Reclamation Plan <br />1. Please see 34-32-116 (1)(m). <br />3. These next 3 items have apparently become fun topics for <br />argument by vegetation experts. The operator believes <br />34-32-117(5) and Regulation 7.7(b) place the final responsibility <br />for successful reclamation on the operator. That being the case, <br />the Division can hardly expect to dictate methods of reclamation. <br />The operator believes the staff has in mind his best interests <br />but he feels that if he is going to mess up, he should be allowed <br />to do it on his own in his own way. The operator appreciates your <br />recommendations and will consider them as operations progress. <br />5 Same as 3 above. <br />7. Same as 3 above. <br />8. Different question. The operator will always use the safest, <br />fastest, easiest and cheapest means available. Whether or not the <br />Division would conduct the reclamation in the same manner if <br />required to do so, we cannot tell. You may consider that we have <br />not answered your question but we have, while, leaving the means <br />and methods of operation open to the operators discretion. <br />D. Exhibit H - Wildlife Information <br />1. We find the first paragraph of Regulation 2.12(8) ludicrous <br />and in need of revision. The Division of Wildlife personnel <br />usually see no reason to respond to requests for assistance in <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.